| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:42:08 +0530
From: "Girish kathalagiri" <girish.sk@...il.com>
To: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Gregory Haskins" <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
kravetz@...ibm.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
pmorreale@...ell.com, sdietrich@...ell.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH RT] push waiting rt tasks to cpus with lower prios.
On 10/9/07, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> This has been complied tested (and no more ;-)
>
>
> The idea here is when we find a situation that we just scheduled in an
> RT task and we either pushed a lesser RT task away or more than one RT
> task was scheduled on this CPU before scheduling occurred.
>
> The answer that this patch does is to do a O(n) search of CPUs for the
> CPU with the lowest prio task running. When that CPU is found the next
> highest RT task is pushed to that CPU.
It can be extended: Search CPU that is running the lowest priority or
the same priority as the highest RT task (which is tried to be
pushed).
If any CPU is found to be running lower priority task (lowest among
the CPU) as above push the task to the CPU.
Else if no CPU was found with lower priority, find CPU that runs a
task of same priority .... In this there are two cases
case 1. if the currently running task on this CPU is higher priority
than the task running (ie active task priority) , then RT task can be
pushed to the CPU (where it competes with the similar priority task in
round robin fashion ).
case 2: if the priority of the task that is running and the task that
is trying to be pushed are same (from the same queue ..
queue->next->next....) then the balancing has to be done on the number
of task that are running on these CPUs. making them run equal (or
almost , considering the ping-pong effect ) number of tasks.
>
> Some notes:
>
> 1) no lock is taken while looking for the lowest priority CPU. When one
> is found, only that CPU's lock is taken and after that a check is made
> to see if it is still a candidate to push the RT task over. If not, we
> try the search again, for a max of 3 tries.
>
> 2) I only do this for the second highest RT task on the CPU queue. This
> can be easily changed to do it for all RT tasks until no more can be
> pushed off to other CPUs.
>
> This is a simple approach right now, and is only being posted for
> comments. I'm sure more can be done to make this more efficient or just
> simply better.
>
> -- Steve
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>
> Index: linux-2.6.23-rc9-rt2/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc9-rt2.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc9-rt2/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -304,6 +304,7 @@ struct rq {
> #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> unsigned long rt_nr_running;
> unsigned long rt_nr_uninterruptible;
> + int curr_prio;
> #endif
>
> unsigned long switch_timestamp;
> @@ -1485,6 +1486,87 @@ next_in_queue:
> static int double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest);
>
> /*
> + * If the current CPU has more than one RT task, see if the non
> + * running task can migrate over to a CPU that is running a task
> + * of lesser priority.
> + */
> +static int push_rt_task(struct rq *this_rq)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *next_task;
> + struct rq *lowest_rq = NULL;
> + int tries;
> + int cpu;
> + int dst_cpu = -1;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + BUG_ON(!spin_is_locked(&this_rq->lock));
> +
> + next_task = rt_next_highest_task(this_rq);
> + if (!next_task)
> + return 0;
> +
> + /* We might release this_rq lock */
> + get_task_struct(next_task);
> +
> + /* Only try this algorithm three times */
> + for (tries = 0; tries < 3; tries++) {
> + /*
> + * Scan each rq for the lowest prio.
> + */
> + for_each_cpu_mask(cpu, next_task->cpus_allowed) {
> + struct rq *rq = &per_cpu(runqueues, cpu);
> +
> + if (cpu == smp_processor_id())
> + continue;
> +
> + /* no locking for now */
> + if (rq->curr_prio > next_task->prio &&
> + (!lowest_rq || rq->curr_prio < lowest_rq->curr_prio)) {
> + dst_cpu = cpu;
> + lowest_rq = rq;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (!lowest_rq)
> + break;
> +
> + if (double_lock_balance(this_rq, lowest_rq)) {
> + /*
> + * We had to unlock the run queue. In
> + * the mean time, next_task could have
> + * migrated already or had its affinity changed.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(task_rq(next_task) != this_rq ||
> + !cpu_isset(dst_cpu, next_task->cpus_allowed))) {
> + spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* if the prio of this runqueue changed, try again */
> + if (lowest_rq->curr_prio <= next_task->prio) {
> + spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + deactivate_task(this_rq, next_task, 0);
> + set_task_cpu(next_task, dst_cpu);
> + activate_task(lowest_rq, next_task, 0);
> +
> + set_tsk_need_resched(lowest_rq->curr);
> +
> + spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock);
> + ret = 1;
> +
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + put_task_struct(next_task);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> * Pull RT tasks from other CPUs in the RT-overload
> * case. Interrupts are disabled, local rq is locked.
> */
> @@ -2207,7 +2289,8 @@ static inline void finish_task_switch(st
> * If we pushed an RT task off the runqueue,
> * then kick other CPUs, they might run it:
> */
> - if (unlikely(rt_task(current) && rq->rt_nr_running > 1)) {
> + rq->curr_prio = current->prio;
> + if (unlikely(rt_task(current) && push_rt_task(rq))) {
> schedstat_inc(rq, rto_schedule);
> smp_send_reschedule_allbutself_cpumask(current->cpus_allowed);
> }
> Index: linux-2.6.23-rc9-rt2/kernel/sched_rt.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc9-rt2.orig/kernel/sched_rt.c
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc9-rt2/kernel/sched_rt.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,48 @@ static struct task_struct *pick_next_tas
> return next;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> +static struct task_struct *rt_next_highest_task(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> + struct rt_prio_array *array = &rq->rt.active;
> + struct task_struct *next;
> + struct list_head *queue;
> + int idx;
> +
> + if (likely (rq->rt_nr_running < 2))
> + return NULL;
> +
> + idx = sched_find_first_bit(array->bitmap);
> + if (idx >= MAX_RT_PRIO) {
> + WARN_ON(1); /* rt_nr__running is bad */
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + queue = array->queue + idx;
> + if (queue->next->next != queue) {
> + /* same prio task */
> + next = list_entry(queue->next->next, struct task_struct, run_list);
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + /* slower, but more flexible */
> + idx = find_next_bit(array->bitmap, MAX_RT_PRIO, idx+1);
> + if (idx >= MAX_RT_PRIO) {
> + WARN_ON(1); /* rt_nr_running was 2 and above! */
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + queue = array->queue + idx;
> + next = list_entry(queue->next, struct task_struct, run_list);
> +
> + out:
> + return next;
> +
> +}
> +#else /* CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */
> +
> +#endif /* CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */
> +
> static void put_prev_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> {
> update_curr_rt(rq);
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
Thanks
Giri
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists